Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 29 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, March 10, 2005, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize several outstanding individuals from my district in West Virginia who have been nominated to our nation's service academies.

Making nominations to our nation's service academies is one of my most important duties as a Congresswoman.

These young men and women are all impressive individuals that have clearly demonstrated academic excellence, extracurricular involvement, and athletic achievements.

Their parents, teachers, and advisors should be very proud of their prestigious accomplishments.

I commend their parents and family for encouraging and supporting these young men and women in the pursuit of their dreams.

I am pleased they have decided to pursue military careers.

Those who choose military careers represent the best of West Virginia and ensure our state motto continues to ring true, ``Montani Semper Liberi . . . Mountaineers Are Always Free''.

There is no better way for them to use their talents.

I extend my sincerest congratulations for their nominations.

I am very proud of them.

These young men and women have my very best wishes for a bright future.

Jeremy Runco, Ranson; Thomas Flanagan, Charles Town; Sheena Huffman, Gerrardstown; Jerome Lademan, Charles Town; Samuel Talbott, Elkins; Tina Weekley, Ravenswood; Blake Chapman, Charleston; Garrett Dilley, Hurricane; Allen Hartley, Charleston; Alex Hemmelgarn, Clay; Matthew Kearns, Cross Lanes; Brian Martin, St. Albans; Jonathan McCormick, St. Albans; Noah Pfost, Ravenswood; Joshua Russell, Nitro; Joshua Suesli, Gassaway.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 95 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

On Tuesday, the Committee on Rules met and granted a structured rule for H.R. 310, the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005. This is a fair rule that I believe all Members of the House should be able to support.

This bipartisan bill brings penalties for network television programming to modern standards. The legislation also enhances the Federal Communications Commission's ability to reprimand networks and individuals who violate indecency standards.

In the last few years, there have been several instances that have prompted the need for this legislation. Two immediately come to mind. During the 2003 Golden Globe Awards, pop star Bono of the band U2 used offensive language while accepting an award on live television; and, of course, there is the infamous debacle that was the 2004 Super Bowl half-time show which I, by the way, was watching with my own family.

Each incident occurred during prime time hours and both programs were widely viewed by families across the Nation. Parents should not have to be unwillingly subjected to vulgar behavior and blatant disregard for what is appropriate for prime time viewing hours.

Provisions in H.R. 310 will increase the FCC fines for indecent broadcasts from $32,000 per incident to $500,000 per incident which will be applied to the network and other parties who knowingly participated and approved of the broadcast. There is also a 3-strikes provision that will give the FCC the option of revoking broadcast licenses of frequent offenders. This legislation protects local networks and broadcast companies from fines if they did not have prior knowledge, if they did not give approval or were unable to prevent the indecent broadcast from the parent company or network from happening in the first place. This provision judiciously places responsibility where it truly lies by protecting innocent parties.

I am a strong supporter of this bipartisan legislation. We have made many strides in recent years providing parents with rating information they can use to determine what is appropriate for their children to view. We cannot tolerate instances where G-rated programming is intentionally and unknowingly to the audience turned into R-rated programming.

These are good changes to improve the quality of television available to our children and families. I urge my colleagues to support the Upton-Markey manager's amendment. It is a strong bipartisan amendment that makes necessary clarifications and improvements to this legislation. To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my distinguished colleague and new member of the Committee on Rules with me.

(Mr. COLE of Oklahoma asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to remind the Members that the issue that we are speaking about today in this bill is the raising of the fines for indecency, caused by several incidents, I think over a million, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) quoted last night in our Committee on Rules meeting, instances of inappropriate viewing on our television and our airwaves and on our radios.

So I think to keep the focus of this bill and this rule is important for the Members to realize that this is something that goes right to the crux of our families.

I yield to the gentleman from Vermont.

Mr. Speaker, I think the standard for inappropriate on the airwaves has been established by the FCC, and they are the ones.

This bill does not speak to that. This bill speaks to raising of the fines.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, in wrapping up my previous statement, I just want to realize what the focus of this bill and what the focus of the rule is on.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to make a couple of comments regarding the gentleman's observations.

I did not state it was inappropriate to debate this on the House floor, and I am only speaking about the indecency and the raising of fines in terms of a standard that is set by our Federal courts. So I take exception with that.

I also take exception with his ownership of democracy. This is what democracy is. We are debating democracy, we

are debating issues on the House floor, which we do every single day, and I am proud to be a part of that.

The other thing I would say in terms of the bill we are discussing, I think it is important to remember that over 2 years ago, I believe, we passed this bill in enormous bipartisan fashion. It was brought to the committee by both the chairman and the minority Chair of that committee in unison in terms of the manager's amendment and the intent of the bill. So I believe that Members will know this is a bill we have worked on before.

Personally, I was raised in the 1950s and 1960s, when I used to sit down and watch ``Bonanza'' and the ``Wide World of Disney.'' My mother did not have to have the remote control in her hand, which they did not have at the time anyway, to make sure I did not see anything inappropriate. All we are trying to do here is to raise the level of fines for those who willfully and intentionally have indecent and inappropriate action on television.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and a new member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, most of this debate has focused not on the issue before the House, whether we should raise fines on broadcasters and artists for violating the FCC standards for indecent conduct, but on the unrelated issue of media fairness. I want to point out to the Members that the amendment proposed by the gentlewoman from New York would violate House rules because it is not germane to the underlying bill. Simply, we have broad bipartisan agreement that we need to be tougher on broadcasters and artists to make sure that children and parents are not surprised by indecent conduct during prime time. We should defer to the committee of jurisdiction, I believe, to evaluate the issues raised by the gentlewoman's well-intentioned but nongermane amendment.

In closing, I would like to reiterate that the FCC has been looking at this issue of indecency and the fines related to it and it is through their efforts that this bipartisan bill has come to bear.

This is about the preservation of family time on our airwaves. It is about preserving the core values and ridding the airwaves during family time of indecency and it ups and makes much more stringent the penalties of those broadcasters and artists who engage in this indecent and inappropriate behavior on the airwaves.

One of the things my colleague from New York said in her opening statement is that viewers need to know what they will see, and I think that is the crux of this bill and this rule. Viewers need to know, families need to know that when they sit down with their families to watch television, they are not going to be exposed to inappropriate and indecent comments or actions on the airwaves.

This is a bipartisan bill. It passed overwhelmingly in the last Congress. I believe it will pass overwhelmingly again here. I urge my colleagues to not only support the rule but to support the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Class Action Fairness Act because we cannot act fast enough. We have been trying to act to address the dire needs of our Nation's judicial system.

Today, predatory lawyers take advantage of class action law by shopping for venues where they can find sympathetic judges and juries. Each time a lawyer goes venue shopping, it costs taxpayers and it costs our economy by bogging down job creators with frivolous and excessive litigation.

National Review magazine has called my home State of West Virginia one of the worst States because of its cruel legal climate. Data and statistics indicate that since 1978, legal costs in West Virginia have risen more than 10 times faster than the State economy as a whole. As a result, our economy has not grown as fast as the rest of the Nation, and the jobs that West Virginians seek to support their families are not as readily available as they are in other parts of our country.

West Virginia's civil justice system has been ranked as one of the worst when it comes to the treatment of class actions. As a result of West Virginia's relaxation and less vigorous application of procedural rules, courts are generally viewed by lawyers as more favorable and advantageous to plaintiffs, and accordingly West Virginia has become a magnet of mass tort litigation. What is very alarming is when a victim receives little or no compensation.

The Class Action Fairness Act aims to curb class settlements that provide significant fees to a lawyer with marginal benefits to victims. The Class Action Fairness Act takes strong steps to ensure injured consumers recoup real awards from victorious verdicts, rather than settlements that involve coupons, which largely benefit the lawyers.

The Class Action Fairness Act creates important reforms that will reduce lawsuit abuse and protect individuals. It is as simple as that. I urge support for this legislation, and for the fair and balanced rule before us.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Frank Woodruff Buckles, a World War I veteran who lives in Jefferson County, WV, and cordially ask my colleagues here in the House of Representatives to join me in wishing Mr. Buckles a happy 104th birthday.

Frank Woodruff Buckles was born in Harrison County, MO, in 1901. At age 16, Mr. Buckles enlisted in the U.S. Army and remains today one of America's few surviving Veterans of the Great War. Following the Armistice of 1918, Mr. Buckles helped escort POWs back to Germany, only to ironically become a POW himself while working for a steamship company in the Philippines during the Japanese invasion of 1941. As a POW, Frank Buckles took it upon himself to help his fellow prisoners by tending the sick and feeding the hungry. In fact, Mr. Buckles even convinced the Japanese, who were starving and torturing the prisoners, to allow him to plant a vegetable garden in the camp so the prisoners would have more rations. On February 23, 1945, General MacArthur got word of the prisoners and ordered the 11th Airborne Division to rescue them. With no casualties taken during the rescue, the prisoners were freed and their 3-year ordeal was finally over.

Following the war, Frank married Audrey Mayo and moved to the farm in Jefferson County, WV that his ancestors have owned since 1732. At age 104, Frank Buckles continues to work the farm, drive his tractor, and likes to read books in several different languages. Frank Buckles is an American hero and truly an inspiration to us all.

In honor of Frank Buckles and his many years of hard work, dedication, and commitment to his family, community, and. country, I

ask my friends in Jefferson County and my colleagues here in Congress to join me in wishing him a happy 104th birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Valerie Williams, the Buckhannon

Business and Professional Woman of the Year, and to proclaim October 18-22, 2004 National Businesswomen's Week.

Working women now number 62.7 million strong in America's workforce and strive to serve their communities, their states, and their nation in professional, civic and cultural capacities. In particular, I acknowledge the significant contributions of the Business and Professional Women of Buckhannon, West Virginia, to their city, state, and nation.

Women-owned businesses account for over one-third of all firms in the country and employ one in four American workers. Major goals of business and professional women are to promote equality for all women and to help create better conditions for businesswomen through the study of social, educational, economic, and political problems.

All of us are proud of women's leadership in these many endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Valerie Williams as Buckhannon Business and Professional Woman of the Year and in proclaiming October 18-22 National Businesswomen's Week.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Maranatha Fellowship Church in Saint Albans, West Virginia, and their celebration of twenty-eight (28) years of service to the Kanawha Valley and surrounding area.

On October 13, 1976, Pastor James R. Wright, Jr. held a service in the living room of a home in Dunbar, West Virginia. Twenty-eight (28) years later, Maranatha and Rev. Wright minister to a loving, caring congregation of over 3,000 people from every walk of life.

In particular, I acknowledge Dr. James R. Wright, Jr., Pastor of Maranatha Fellowship

Church. Through Dr. Wright's vision and leadership, this church has made a significant contribution to the lives of thousands of West Virginians.

Maranatha is also widely known for the Semi-annual Passion Play that was created by Virginia Wright, wife of Pastor James Wright. This play reaches 15,000-18,000 people in eight performances, which is another example of this church's ever-growing ministry.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Maranatha Fellowship Church as they celebrate their twenty-eight years of ministry to the Kanawha Valley and West Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the passing and honor the life and contributions of a former First Lady of the state of West Virginia, Hovah Hall Underwood.

Hovah earned an AB Degree from Salem College and a certificate in Social Work from West Virginia University. She taught at Grantsville Elementary School, worked in a defense plant during World War II, and then served ten years as a child welfare worker in West Virginia before marrying Cecil Underwood in 1948.

Hovah was a young wife and mother when she and Cecil moved into the Governor's mansion in 1956--Cecelia was a toddler, and Craig and Sharon were both born while the family lived in the mansion. She served as a gracious first lady all the while focusing her energies on the task of raising three very young children.

In 1996, the citizens of West Virginia once again elected Cecil Underwood as Governor, and Hovah was once again our First Lady. Building upon a lifelong dedication to the work of Big Brothers/Big Sisters, she always liked to say that in this term she focused her energies on all the children of West Virginia. She was the driving force behind new programs to strengthen early learning and volunteerism in West Virginia.

Upon learning that our state has one of the highest rates of cancer among women in the nation, Hovah took the lead as the catalyst for expanded Breast Cancer Awareness and Screening initiatives. Hovah Underwood took seriously the charge to serve others each day of our lives, and her legacy is the many thousands of lives she touched.

At her Memorial Service, many remarked upon Hovah's wonderful smile. We know today that each time a young child learns to read, each time a ``Big'' and a ``Little'' share a special moment, each time a woman is saved from cancer, Hovah is smiling.

Our thoughts are with Governor Underwood, their children Cecelia Baker, Craig Underwood and Sharon Underwood, grandchildren Christopher and Coleman Richardson, Mary and Quintin Baker and Jordan and Myles Underwood.

All West Virginians have lost a very special friend.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) the Committee on Rules, the Departments of Justice and Transportation, the Subcommittee on Railroads of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the many others who are supporting me in this initiative.

Mr. Chairman, in the wake of the September 11th attacks, as well as the recent bombing of four commuter trains in Madrid, Spain, the need for stronger criminal laws to deal with terrorists and other violence has never been stronger. Intelligence reports last spring indicate that some terrorists might try to bomb U.S. rail lines or buses in major U.S. cities. We have also heard reports of so-called ``dirty bombs'' that can be easily transported over our extensive mass transportation system.

Mr. Chairman, I do not have to remind anyone in this body of the potential loss of life and disruption to our economy and way of life from this modern new threat.

In order to help meet this threat head on, I have introduced an amendment that revises, enhances, and consolidates two Federal criminal law statutes into one comprehensive statute in order to deter and more effectively punish terrorist acts against railroad carriers and other mass transportation providers.

Specifically, under current Federal criminal law, terrorist acts against railroad carriers are prosecuted under the so-called ``Wrecking Trains'' statute which was enacted in 1940. This statute is in many ways outdated, full of gaps and inconsistencies, and quite literally inadequately addresses modern threats like radioactive materials or biological agents.

Additionally, the September 11 attacks on our homeland gave rise to the creation of another Federal criminal statute which covers terrorist acts against mass transportation systems. By combining these two statutes to cover all forms of transportation and railway carriers, we can introduce more consistency, predictability, and effectiveness into Federal prosecutorial powers.

First, it would reduce our criminal law's vulnerability to bogus legal claims and also prevent prosecutors from having to prosecute for lesser offenses because of discrepancies or gaps in the current law. Richard Reid, known as the Shoe Bomber, was actually able to have a charge against him

dismissed because the new mass transportation statute did not explicitly define an airplane as a vehicle for purposes of prosecuting under the statute. My amendment will prevent oversights like this from happening.

Secondly, my amendment will bring more consistent and uniform protections to all modes of railroad carriers and mass transportation providers.

Third, my amendment will expand the jurisdictional reach of criminal law to cover more offenses, such as the release of biological agents or radioactive material, and cover more property if the prohibited conduct affects interstate commerce or travel, or communicating, or transporting prohibited materials across State lines.

Fourth, my amendment will make capital punishment an option under aggravating circumstances that involve terrorist acts that result in the death of a person. If our jurisdictional system is unable to have this tool at their disposal in order to meet the new threats that terrorism has brought upon us, then we will lose a critical opportunity to deter and prevent more terrorism from happening.

And fifth, my amendment protects all law enforcement, railroad carriers, and mass transportation providers from criminal liability if they are performing their duties in the course of lawful and authorized activities. In other words, my amendment protects conduct that should be protected, but does not protect conduct that should not be protected such as terrorist or imposters posing as rail or mass transportation employees.

Mr. Chairman, overall, Congress has taken dramatic steps in the last 3 years to improve our security here and abroad, but there is more work to be accomplished. I strongly urge passage of this amendment to H.R. 10.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott). I would like to say that in working through this amendment, we did work with the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. We are also trying to reform an act here, the 1940 Wrecking Trains statute, that is sorely outdated and full of gaps. When it was conceived, there was no conception of a terrorist bombing on mass transportation. I think we know, obviously from the events in Spain, that that is a very real possibility in terms of acts of terrorism.

Mr. Chairman, the purpose of my amendment is to not only pull that 1940s Wrecking Train statute into the modern era, but also to combine it with other mass transportation sections so that not only the deterrent but the prosecutorial powers are available to our prosecutors to be able to use the most stringent and severe punishments that could possibly be available to try to use as a deterrent to terrorism.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

I think there is a lot of prosecutorial discretion in the bill, and I think that would probably be left up to the prosecutor.

In terms of the death penalty, I think that is definitely at the discretion of the prosecutor, and there are two sets of offenses there. One is a 20-year and one is a 30-year minimum, and I think that is also at the discretion of the prosecutors. That is my understanding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the passing and honor the life of and contributions of a former first lady of the State of West Virginia, Hovah Hall Underwood. Hovah was a young wife and mother when she and her husband, Cecil, moved into the Governor's mansion in 1956. Cecelia was a toddler, and Craig and Sharon were both born while the family lived in the mansion. She served as a gracious first lady, all the while focusing her energies on the task of raising three very young children.

In 1996 the citizens of West Virginia once again elected Cecil Underwood as Governor, and Hova was once again our First Lady. Building upon a lifelong dedication to the work of Big Brothers/Big Sisters, she always liked to say that this term she focused her energies on all the children of West Virginia. She was the driving force behind new programs to strengthen early learning and volunteerism in our State.

She took seriously the charge to serve others each day of our lives, and her legacy is the many thousands of lives that she touched. Our thoughts today are with Governor Underwood, their children, Cecelia Baker, Craig Underwood and Sharon Underwood, grandchildren Christopher and Coleman Richardson, Mary and Quinton Baker, and Jordan and Myles Underwood.

All West Virginians have indeed lost a very special friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a great West Virginian, constituent and friend, Robert Harman. For the past forty years, Bob has served as the Chief Executive Officer and Administrator of Grant Memorial Hospital. His service makes him the longest-tenured hospital chief executive in our nation's history. Bob has worked tirelessly to ensure the citizens of Grant County, West Virginia have access to high quality health services. His shrewd fiscal management of the hospital has resulted in very few years where the hospital operated at a deficit; which is quite an accomplishment for an industry that has faced financial problems as a whole. He has often been on the leading edge of implementing new technologies to improve services and make the hospital more cost effective.

In addition to his service at Grant Memorial, Bob has been a leading advocate and expert on rural health issues. Over the past thirty years, Bob has served on numerous state and national committees, boards and task forces pertaining to the delivery of health care in rural areas. He has shared his experiences and advised members of the West Virginia Congressional delegation.

I am proud to call Bob a friend and fellow West Virginian and am honored to be able to share in this great accomplishment.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

My amendment to H.R. 5025 seeks to keep the collection of taxes in the IRS and not to a private debt collector. I wish to make it clear today that I am in complete support of efficient and effective enforcement of tax collection activities at all levels of the Federal Government. I also realize that we must recover the billions and billions of dollars in uncollected and delinquent tax revenue, but at what cost.

If we authorize the Treasury to allow the IRS to contract with private companies to collect delinquent Federal taxes, I am extremely concerned that harm could result from handing over sensitive personal and financial tax information to private sector businesses to carry out what OMB and IRS have officially characterized as an inherently governmental function.

Allowing for private debt collection contracts could create a multitude of problems. For instance, any negligent or criminal disclosure of sensitive taxpayer data by private sector tax collectors could result in fraudulent charges through identity theft and ruined credit histories for innocent taxpayers.

Moreover, the potential for harassment by debt collectors is compounded by the private sector tax collection practice of using incentive-based commission compensation. In other words, the more aggressive one is in their collection practices, through misrepresentations or threatening to take actions a person should not take, the more money they can personally make as a private sector tax collector. This system could encourage much more confrontational and abusive tactics that could violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Additionally, the Federal Government has tested this concept of private sector tax collection in the past. In 1996, a pilot program provided $13 million to examine the impact of private tax collection. The General Accounting Office reported that private companies collected $3.1 million in revenue while incurring expenses to the Federal Government in the exact same amount. Moreover, the GAO found that the pilot program caused the Internal Revenue Service to lose as much as $17 million in lost collection opportunities. We cannot afford to implement this type of inefficiency.

Mr. Chairman, the Reagan administration rejected private sector tax collection in 1986; and they stated: ``The public must be assured at all times that the person collecting taxes derives no personal benefits from that activity and that the integrity of the tax system will not be compromised.''

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment so that we can continue to ensure the integrity of our tax system and the American taxpayers are protected.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Offered By: Mrs. Capito

Amendment No. 10: Page 166, after line 3, insert the

following new section:

Sec. 647. None of the funds appropriated by the Act may be

used to plan, enter into, implement, or provide oversight of

contracts between the Secretary of the Treasury, or his

designee, and any private collection agency.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1576, the Harpers Ferry National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2004. Harpers Ferry is at the eastern-most portion of my congressional district and borders on Virginia and Maryland and has a very historic significance in our Nation's history.

This legislation represents cooperative efforts among local civic groups and the National Park Service to preserve an additional 1,240 acres of West Virginia's historic and pristine wilderness from development.

In addition, expanding the park will help make a significant investment in the local tourist economy by attracting an estimated 25,000 additional visitors to the eastern panhandle of West Virginia each year. New visitors mean more revenues for area businesses, and that keeps the local economy moving forward.

Expanding the park represents a reasonable and necessary investment in the future of this national treasure. This portion of West Virginia is undergoing tremendous growth; and placing these additional 1,200 acres under the governance of the National Park Service will preserve this area of West Virginia from further economic development, but more historic development.

Last summer I walked the Murphy Farm, an area in the proposed expansion. I was able to see a part of America rich in Civil War and civil rights history as well as breathtaking beauty. The passage of this legislation will allow the local community, the National Park Service, and various nonprofit organizations to work together in partnership to preserve a historic part of our country's heritage, a section of America which is now West Virginia that Thomas Jefferson once remarked was ``worth a trip across the Atlantic.''

Madam Speaker, I can assure all of my colleagues that this legislation is worth their support, and I urge them to make a trip across Maryland to Harpers Ferry where they can visit a beautiful parcel of West Virginia, Harpers Ferry National Park.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5008) to provide an additional temporary extension of programs under the Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 through September 30, 2004, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5008.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this bill extends until September 30 the programs of the Small Business Administration not covered by an appropriation, including the Preferred Surety Bond Program, SBA's Private Sector Cosponsorship Authority, the Small Disadvantaged Business Procurement Assistance Program, the Small Business Development Center Drug-Free Workplace Assistance Grants Program and the Very Small Business Concerns Program.

Last June, the House acted responsibly by passing H.R. 4478 to extend the programs of the SBA, but the other body failed to act. These programs have been in limbo since June 4, and it is important that they are extended while we continue to work on an SBA reauthorization bill.

In addition, H.R. 5008 would help many existing Women's Business Centers keep their doors open. Passage of H.R. 5008 would free up the remaining $4 million already appropriated for the program this year to provide at a minimum approximately $70,000 to each Women's Business Center and sustainability status.

Finally, H.R. 5008 corrects a legal problem regarding how the SBA pays fiscal transfer agents, who provide a vital role in the secondary market. For nearly 10 years, the SBA's fiscal transfer agent has been paid by a float on interest on the pools of securitized 7(a) guaranteed loans. Recently there has been some confusion as to whether or not this practice violates the Anti-Deficiency Act. The SBA has proposed a fix to this problem, and that solution is incorporated in section 3 of H.R. 5008, which essentially codifies the existing practice.

Passage of this legislation is needed in order to prevent the crippling of the SBA's 7(a) loan program, because without the liquidity of a secondary market banks will not make as many 7(a) loans as in the past.

This bipartisan bill has the support of the ranking minority member, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), and it has the support of the Bush administration. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5008.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

While reauthorization is extremely important, I think it would behoove us at this time to really think about all of the things that have been done and are in the process of being done for small businesses here and across America.

Twenty-five million small business owners will receive tax relief, totaling $75 billion. That is real savings. The rate reductions in the tax benefit plan is more than 90 percent small business. We also have raised the small business expensing limit from $25,000 to $100,000, and I can tell my colleagues in my home State of West Virginia, small businesses are beginning to do and beginning to feel the growth effects of being able to hire another person, being able to buy that extra piece of equipment as a result of the tax incentives.

Regulation, which is another burdensome thing on small business, this administration has slowed the growth of burdensome new rules by 75 percent. Also, small businesses saved $7 billion last year in regulatory costs, and that is significant.

We have worked a lot to try to incent and grow our small businesses, and there is always more, much more, that can be done. But in terms of government procurement, for the first time in many years, the Federal Government exceeded its small business goal by providing a record $65.5 billion in prime contracts to small businesses. That is a significant increase over past years.

So, in conclusion, I would like to say that reauthorization of SBA is exceedingly important to small business, and what we are doing here today in extending the authorization is extremely important. But much has been done and much needs to still continue to be done to help small business, which is the backbone of our American economy.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for not only her advocacy for this bill before us today, but for her advocacy for small business. She is one of the staunchest cheerleaders for small businesses across this Nation, and I appreciate her service and her ability to get things done.

I thank our chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Manzullo), who is not with us today, to thank him also for his small business advocacy. It is good to know that we have a bipartisan opinion on this bill. I look forward to its passage, and I look forward to all of us working together to see that small business not only grows but thrives under this bill and also under further legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.